Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: 22 years ago
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
JK2006 |
When decent police officers see solid proof and evidence that a false accuser is lying, to continue a case to court is a crime. It is Attempting to Pervert the Course of Justice.
Example in my case - a False Accuser, when asked again and again if he'd had any further contact with me after the first and only time, replied, on oath, "No; why would I have?" - exact words. Then we found his mother, who said he'd had numerous phone calls from me and received several records in the post.
In court he went white and almost collapsed. He was furious we'd spoken to the mother. "Thank you so much" he said sarcastically.
But the police and CPS knew this (disclosure goes both ways).
So why did they allow him to step into the Witness Box and perjure himself?
And why were some of the bent cops allowed to keep their jobs (and even get promoted)?
Disgraceful. And by knowing this, and supporting the bent cops, their bosses should be sacked too. |
|
JK2006 |
I greatly regret starting the exposure of Max Clifford especially as his sentence (consecutive not concurrent) was manifestly unfair and it was awful that he died in prison (which he must have hated; his character being nearly the total opposite to mine).
So I wouldn't wish that fate on anybody - not even my worst enemy and Clifford was far from that, as indeed, neither is Mark Williams Thomas.
But you cannot control Karma. He or she controls you. |
|
Jo |
I suspect that most journalists won't look into this guy because it would be too much effort. On the other hand, some might be unable to find their arse with both hands, let alone begin to know how to find articles in the Daily Mail or other sources.
Recently the BBC's "flagship news and current affairs programme", the Today programme on Radio 4, gave a platform to the CEO of a self-described financial advisory firm that operates worldwide and "advises" its clients in such a way that they lose large chunks of their savings/pensions. Its treatment of clients and their money was the subject of a long article in the Sunday Times a few months ago and its CEO was recently fined and banned by the South African financial regulator from doing business there for five years, as reported by various sources easily found online. But the BBC doesn't seem to be aware of this, or even of its own 2010 Panorama investigation "Who took my pension?", which dipped a toe in the water into how the firm operates, showing how an offshoot had tricked a blind man out of a large chunk of his pension and how the firm itself is very "commission-driven" (putting it mildly). So they interviewed the CEO as a supposed property expert. He chuckled through the interview, probably unable to contain his glee at getting one over the BBC. |
|
Indigestible |
Would be a beautiful thing if MWT met the same fate as Max Clifford. |
|
Green Man |
Blame the trashy ITV for giving him a platform. |
|
|
|
